Lying Liberals Busted

Moderateman

Join Date 11/2004

+37

Lying Liberals Busted

An Article by Sweet Ann Coulter

In their latest demonstration of how much they love the troops, liberals have produced yet another anti-war hoax.

The New Republic has been running "true war" stories from a brave, anonymous liberal penning dispatches from Iraq. The famed "Baghdad Diarist" described his comrades joyfully using Bradley fighting vehicles to crush stray dogs, mocking a female whose face had been blown off by an IED, and defacing Iraqi corpses by wearing skull parts on their own heads.

Various conservatives began questioning the plausibility of the anonymous diarist's account -- noting, for example, that Bradley vehicles don't "swerve," as the diarist claimed. The editor of The New Republic responded by attacking the skeptics' motives, complaining that some conservatives make "a living denying any bad news that emanates from Iraq."

But when that clever retort failed to quiet rumblings from the right wing, The New Republic finally revealed the "Baghdad Diarist" to be ... John Kerry! Actually it was Pvt. Scott Thomas Beauchamp, Democratic candidate for president circa 2028. (That gives him 20 years to learn to pronounce "Genghis.")

In revealing himself two weeks ago, Beauchamp lashed out at "people who have never served in Iraq." He said he was too busy fighting "an actual war" to participate in "an ideological battle that I never wanted to join."

He had tried to stay out of ideological battles by writing made-up articles in a national magazine claiming soldiers in Iraq had become callous beasts because of George Bush's war, killing to "secure the riches of the empire." Alas, this proved an ineffective method of keeping his head low. Beauchamp's next bid for privacy will be an attempt to host "The Price Is Right."

In response to Beauchamp's revelation that he was the "Baghdad Diarist," the military opened an investigation into his allegations. There was no corroboration for his stories, and Beauchamp promptly signed an affidavit admitting that every single thing he wrote in The New Republic was a lie.

According to The Weekly Standard's Michael Goldfarb -- who has led the charge of those who "make a living denying any bad news that emanates from Iraq" -- Maj. Steven F. Lamb, the deputy public affairs officer for Multi-National Division-Baghdad, said this of the Baghdad diarist:

"An investigation has been completed and the allegations made by Pvt. Beauchamp were found to be false. His platoon and company were interviewed and no one could substantiate the claims."

In response, The New Republic went into full Dan Rather loon mode. This astonishing post showed up on The New Republic Web site on Tuesday afternoon:

"A STATEMENT ON SCOTT THOMAS BEAUCHAMP:

"We've talked to military personnel directly involved in the events that Scott Thomas Beauchamp described, and they corroborated his account as detailed in our statement. When we called Army spokesman Maj. Steven F. Lamb and asked about an anonymously sourced allegation that Beauchamp had recanted his articles in a sworn statement, he told us, 'I have no knowledge of that.' He added, 'If someone is speaking anonymously (to The Weekly Standard), they are on their own.' When we pressed Lamb for details on the Army investigation, he told us, 'We don't go into the details of how we conduct our investigations.' -- The Editors"

It's good to see Mary Mapes is working again.

What on earth is going on? Either the military investigation found that Beauchamp lied or it didn't. Either military personnel corroborated stories of soldiers wearing skulls as crowns or they didn't. Either Army spokesman Maj. Steven Lamb gave a statement to The Weekly Standard or he didn't.

At the same time as The New Republic was posting the above statement, which completely contradicted The Weekly Standard's update, renowned right-wing news outlet ABC News confirmed that the military has concluded that Beauchamp was writing "fiction." ABC also quoted Goldfarb's account and said that Maj. Lamb reiterated his statement that Beauchamp's stories were false to ABC. The New York Times had the same story on Wednesday.

The New Republic has gone mad. Perhaps the magazine brought its former employee, fantasist Steven Glass, out of retirement. It's long past time for The New Republic to file for intellectual Chapter 7. Arthur Andersen was implicated in fewer frauds.

And we wonder how Democratic congressmen can lie about a vote they lost on the floor of the House -- captured on CSPAN for all the world to see -- changing the vote so that they win.

America's imminent victory in Iraq and safety from terrorist attacks at home is driving them all crazy.

Locked Post

Advanced Search

Watch this post

Do not email me updates for this post Email me updates for this post

Successfully updated karma reason!

One final note. I did not say I think Kerry Lied. I said he was proven a liar.

When? Who? How? Cite?

Successfully updated karma reason!

WWW Link

WWW Link

WWW Link

WWW Link

WWW Link

WWW Link

WWW Link

Just a handful of the million plus hit you can get on google. Granted some of these are simply he said he said, but given the ones where he is documented to have lied, who are you going to believe when you have 2 people with opposite stories? A proven liar? Or the other guy.

What is especially disturbing are the veterans who recanted what they told Kerry and said they did so under pressure from Kerry and crew. That would bring in to question his entire testimony. On top of that, he stated (not opined, stated) what the policy of the US military was in Vietnam. A statement that has been shown to be a lie.

These are not "little white lies" that can be excused in the heat of debate. These are bald faced lies that go to the character of the person stating them.

Successfully updated karma reason!

SodaihoAugust 14, 2007 20:55:11

are you admitting to a war crime? I have no idea what the fuck you are talking about but in 1965 through 1966 I never heard of such actions as you describe. I did not know a single person that did any of the war crimes Hanoijohn painted ALL OF US WITH. I have nothing but the deepest loathing for Hanoijohn, and hanoijane too.

Then you were insulated. I lit the flame myself on several hooches. War crime? Don't know. I also recall destroying food with grenades

I jumped north a little bit and also destroyed hootches and food stocks, ammo dumps {the underground variety} NOne of these belonged to civilians though.

I don't spend my time "hating 'Hanoijohn' geeze I have better things to do with my life and time. Even the word hatred to to strong as it implies an emotion the opposite and as powerful as love, this is not true of me. I simply loath him, like seeing a huge puddle of pus, his actions disgusted me then and continue to disgust me, he still somehow thinks he is BETTER that the rest of us, his attitude and mouth give truth to this, his latest comment about"if you don't do well in school. you wind up in Iraq" making it seem as though our men and women in the military are stupid.

Successfully updated karma reason!

(Citizen)SodaihoAugust 15, 2007 09:30:07

DrGuy,

Thank you, and MM for this discussion

you are very welcome, and it stayed civilized.

Clearly atrocities were committed. Kerry said that, I said that. These are not lies. There is ample evidence, hundreds if not thousands of oral histories supporting this truth.

come on now, just like the 'oral history' of two members of VVAW that were crying while "confessing" to the terrible deeds they did in Nam, later to be found out they not only were never in Nam they both were never in the military.
Of course crimes get committed in war, Guys get all crazy in shit, yeh some guys do everything that Hanoijohn testified too, BUT in 1973 he did not make it SOUND like a few guys, he made it sound like ALL OF US, he compares us to the hoards of "Genghis Khan" Pillaging and raping on our way across Vietnam. He had an agenda then, he still has an agenda, but he has stuck his foot in his mouth so many times, he will never be President, and that is what he wanted more that anything.

Successfully updated karma reason!

First link: Fox Comics: In the article it reports that the ONE person who made this claim was not supported by all the others.

Second Link: You can'r be serious. This Hobbs blog is a bunch of Rock Head hooey. They cannot discern a "lie" from a mistake from a spin. Political crap.

Third Link: Swift Boat Vets? Give me a break. You know these guys had an asgenda and were funded by the rich windbags of the Republican party...those same windbags who tried to undercut John McCain. They have been discredited.

Dr.Guy. I'm not going to go any further...It seems what you have, in the end, is political side taking with spins to the advantage of the point of view. In truth John Kerry served, fought hard, was wounded three times, and was awared two of our country's highestr awards for heroism under fire.

Successfully updated karma reason!

1973 he did not make it SOUND like a few guys, he made it sound like ALL OF US, he compares us to the hoards of "Genghis Khan" Pillaging and raping on our way across Vietnam. He had an agenda then, he still has an agenda, but he has stuck his foot in his mouth so many times, he will never be President, and that is what he wanted more that anything.

This is where context is always important. The context was what? Testimony in front of congress to get support to end a war as I recall. It was political. I believe both of us understand that hyperbole is a wholseale aspect of THAT process. Mr. Bush spun things every which way he could to enlist the support of congress and the American people to support his war. Some on the left call him a liar, I may have myself. However, I do not think he actually lied. I think he was using the tools of political process. From the right's POV, its OK when their guy does it to support bloodshed; when the left says no and uses it to stop bloodshed, its a lie? Go figure.

See ya!

Successfully updated karma reason!

First link: Fox Comics

If you are going to attack the source, then there is no point in going further. I grabbed a handful that were not blogs. Each one on a different subject. It is apparent that even Buddha himself is not going to sway you from your love of the man, so there is no point in debating with you. Your first words tells the whole story.

Be well in your ignorance, I shall not try to enlighten you any more on the subject. You can spin anything - you cannot spin a lie. I told you the stories were slanted (do you really think the MSM would report them objectively?). The lies are there in the BS. You chose to dismiss the facts because of the source.

That is your problem, and your loss.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I jumped north a little bit and also destroyed hootches and food stocks, ammo dumps {the underground variety} NOne of these belonged to civilians though.

If you destroyed villages, as I did, there was rarely and evidence but a hint that these were used by NVA, and if they were, it was temporary and under coercion. A civilian village is a civilian village. Pacification was a nightmare for the average South Vietnamese.

Aside:

MM, I have no quarrel with you. Life in combat sucks. I just don't want us to be involved in any more of it unless it is absolutely necessary, and even then, I am seriously wary. Things get out of hand under fire; they always do. When I stand opposed to war, I stand opposed to killing. Some people see antiwar people as anti- troops. I think its just the opposite. I think prowar people are anti-troops in the most clear and deadly way. I struggle with combat veterans who still support war. I do not understand them. Just as they, I am sure, do not understand me. Yet, I believe we both have a duty to argue for our view. I just wish we could do so with a degree of grace and respect.

Be well.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Hey there, Listen, we all know Fox has an agenda. No problem. Its a free country. Spin is what Fox is all about. Even in the slanted Fox story, the truth was that only one person suggested Kerry was pressuring him. No one else in the entire group support that. So even in your own link, there was no support of a "Kerry lie".

Do I think Kerry is perfect? Hell no. You are incorrect in your assessment. This issue is not about Kerry its about what a lie is (the original issue with this particular blog, I believe). I would not vote for Kerry, but not because of anything Swift Boat Vets have to say about him.

DrGuy, let me ask you, don't you think both parties spin the "facts" as you want to call them? Is spin a lie?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Listen, we all know Fox has an agenda

No, only to those who cannot stand a news source that is not liberal. You chose the words. you asked for the sources. I provided it to you (although I doubt you are google impaired). I even qualified my sources to account for biases. But nothing but an admission from Buddha (since you do not believe in god) is going to get you to admit what is fact. So you denigrate the sources all you want, and laugh that Fox does not brown nose liberals like the other media does (there are others as well - you just chose to attack instead of research).

I will leave you with these 2 thoughts, which I am sure you will dismiss out of hand.

1. Swiftboat was biased. But have yet to be proven wrong. The only thing proven is that they were out to get Kerry. No one has proved they lied.

2. Inner peace and enlightenment is not a liberal thing. You do not have to be a sycophant for one side to be on a quest for enlightenment. You only have to be a sycophant if you are on a quest to prove a preconcieved conclusion.

Successfully updated karma reason!

(Citizen)SodaihoAugust 15, 2007 14:39:27

MM, I have no quarrel with you. Life in combat sucks. I just don't want us to be involved in any more of it unless it is absolutely necessary, and even then, I am seriously wary. Things get out of hand under fire; they always do. When I stand opposed to war, I stand opposed to killing. Some people see antiwar people as anti- troops. I think its just the opposite. I think prowar people are anti-troops in the most clear and deadly way. I struggle with combat veterans who still support war. I do not understand them. Just as they, I am sure, do not understand me. Yet, I believe we both have a duty to argue for our view. I just wish we could do so with a degree of grace and respect.

Be well.

I do believe that for two people with diametrically opposed views we have both behave quiet well, respectfully and considerate for each others feelings. What goes on between you and anyone else I cannot be held responsible for after all I am just responsible for what comes out of my own mouth, not anyone else's, right?

I forgot to return your welcome home brother, apologies.

Welcome home brother.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I think DrGuy has stock in Rupert Murdock's company. Hmmm. Is stock available or is it a closely held corporation? Every source you listed is a conservative spin machine DrGuy. You still have not addressed the key question, is spin a lie from your point of view?

I'll answer for myself, I don't believe spin is a lie any more than I think hyperbole or distortion is a lie. A lie has a deliberation involved, a purposeful commitment to deceive. Is is possible such things can be construed as lies? Of course, otherwise we would not be having this dialogue. The political process is predicated on putting the best face on something and doing damage control when a mistake is made or political hyperbole goes over the top. All politicians do this; it is part and parcel of the political process.

Frankly, I detest the whole thing, but as I said, I don't go around calling all spinners liars or all conservatives fascists (though some very well may be in the classic sense of the term and they certainly appear to a tad greedy, but that's another blog). Such things obviously improve ratings. But then, lots of people seem drawn to Pro-Wrestling. Is it a sport? Hardly.

Still, it is politics. It is our job as constituents to ascertain the truth independent of the dollars supporting the source or, as you say, the source itself.

Lastly, interesting use of the term, sycophant. I assume you are using it in the verb transitive, that is as a flatterer, slanderer or spreader of malicious rumors. I assume you are referring to Kerry here using rumor inservice to an antiwar cause? Or any protester doing the same? I don't really think this fits. To be a sycophant requires a servile manner. Maybe? Who knows. Politicians are the greatest panderers of all time.

Be well.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I think DrGuy has stock in Rupert Murdock's company. Hmmm. Is stock available or is it a closely held corporation?

I told you I picked several from millions. You are welcome to pick your own. I also told you that continunig this was useless as you cannot debate a brick wall. Whatever you want to say is irrelevant as you have not disputed the facts, only impugned the sources. That is your right, but I shant play your game. I am sorry that you are locked into a track that does not seek truth, except when it fits your model.

You are welcome to dispute the facts given, but your constant attack on the sources is tiresome and not worthy of response in a debate of facts. perhaps you can come up with your own sources. i am sure that dailykos and moveon have never posted a lie and you can use those to refute the lies that the sources I posted have stated amid their hyperbole.

Seriously, and with all due respect, I really expected more from you. I had come to read you as a seeker of truth in the Buddhist way. Now I see it is just another facet of the religions you argue against. And perhaps a little less honest than they are.

Successfully updated karma reason!

besides I want to know how this got sidetracked }{as often happens} from the lying sack of shit "Baghdad Diarist" aka Pvt. Scott Thomas Beauchamp who admittedly wrote lies for the {gag} new republic? to Hanoijohn while they do have the sack of shit factor in common I am talking about LIBERAL lies in this war, not Hanoijohn Kerry and his little dance with the truth in 1973.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Whatever you want to say is irrelevant as you have not disputed the facts, only impugned the sources. That is your right, but I shant play your game.

But DrGuy, I did, in fact, dispute your sources facts. They weren't facts at all. Just one person's view over another. This does not a fact make.

I am sorry that you are locked into a track that does not seek truth, except when it fits your model.

Where is this coming from? I am asking for the truth, seeking the truth. I am asking you, countless times, whether truth is or is not spin. You have not addressed the fundemental question,. It is you, DrGuy, that has his mind made up and locked. As to the source quibble. goodness. How often do you impune the veracity of MSM? I have said its all spin, my sources, your sources. I have trouble when you see yours as truth and mine as lies.

MM. I think this discussion has been on point. The original article is from the queen of spin and hack writing, She Who Cannot Be Named. I see it as spin. We have She who Cannot Be Named saying he lied and the editors who apparently sought sources themselves to discover he did not lie. I frankly don't know. That's the essential problem with media today: all media.

Successfully updated karma reason!

(Citizen)SodaihoAugust 15, 2007 18:33:04

The original article is from the queen of spin and hack writing

alright buddy now you went and done it! MM slips glove off of right hands and gently whacks Sodaiho across both cheeks, duel, in the morning, as the challenged you have choice of weapons. I suggest you bring a second, one that is familar with burial rights.

Successfully updated karma reason!

peace MM, for in his own world, it is true. Mickey Moore and moveon are the gospels of truth. If they do not say it, it is not true. no proof necessary. Only the lack of their acknowledgement of the existance of the facts is enough to prove them wrong. No amount of proof will sway this dictum. For the eternal truth is that which is spoke by the elightened ones. All else is Comics.

Thus we learn the truth of the enlightened one.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Not good enough. To refer to Senators and congressmen as traitors is abhorrent, in my opinion. These individuals have a different point of view and have worked tirelessly on behalf of their constituency and the United States. We should always respect them. You may disagree, but respectfully.

As to John Kerry, I think he is a true hero. Not only did he fight on behalf of his country, received the Bronze Star, Silver Star, and three Purple Hearts, but he had the courage to stand with fellow veterans during the war to stop the bloodshed. No coward here. Frankly, anyone who thinks so is well, I can't say...

I don't know about Kerry meeting with the "enemy". At what point and in what capacity and for what purpose? I know I returned to Vietnam in the mid-eighties and met with several "enemy soldiers". We still refused to have diplomatic relations with Vietnam, so I had to get my visa through Thailand. I guess I must be a traitor as well in your book.

So, if we were to use your logic then, and Iran is part of some wicked enemy front, then shouldn't we be referring to our Secretary of State, TehranCondi?

Not so! While "still" holding a post as a commissioned Naval officer (Lieutenant) he had private talks with the North Vietnamese government officials in Paris. And that is a well documented "fact" and also against US law. And no, getting your visa in Thailand would not be considered treason. What Kerry did is and was. Try reading this:
WWW Link

Successfully updated karma reason!

Reply By: drmilerPosted: Thursday, August 16, 2007
Not good enough. To refer to Senators and congressmen as traitors is abhorrent, in my opinion. These individuals have a different point of view and have worked tirelessly on behalf of their constituency and the United States. We should always respect them. You may disagree, but respectfully.

As to John Kerry, I think he is a true hero. Not only did he fight on behalf of his country, received the Bronze Star, Silver Star, and three Purple Hearts, but he had the courage to stand with fellow veterans during the war to stop the bloodshed. No coward here. Frankly, anyone who thinks so is well, I can't say...

I don't know about Kerry meeting with the "enemy". At what point and in what capacity and for what purpose? I know I returned to Vietnam in the mid-eighties and met with several "enemy soldiers". We still refused to have diplomatic relations with Vietnam, so I had to get my visa through Thailand. I guess I must be a traitor as well in your book.

So, if we were to use your logic then, and Iran is part of some wicked enemy front, then shouldn't we be referring to our Secretary of State, TehranCondi?

Not so! While "still" holding a post as a commissioned Naval officer (Lieutenant) he had private talks with the North Vietnamese government officials in Paris. And that is a well documented "fact" and also against US law. And no, getting your visa in Thailand would not be considered treason. What Kerry did is and was. Try reading this:
WWW Link

geeeze about time you showed up docM and with some brillant facts too. thanks.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Reply By: Island DogPosted: Monday, August 13, 2007
The media in this country has been a fraud for year. Look at the other example I posted a few days ago about Reuters posting "news" that was never verified. Just imagine what the poll "numbers" would be if Americans actually got a fair look at both sides of Iraq.

That would be an Interesting poll, an actual poll of every one of voting age. No slanted set-up polls stacked with one side or the other. Gread idea dog

Successfully updated karma reason!

Reply By: JacobKerrPosted: Monday, August 13, 2007
You do not know me... I have allot of hate for republicans because I believe allot of them are evil and are blindly working on destroying our constitution and what this country stands for! Your evil and you do not even know it...

hate? the actual emotion Hate? yikes? how do you hate 80 million people that you do not know?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Reply By: Texas WahinePosted: Monday, August 13, 2007
What a douche bag.

succinctly put tex.

Successfully updated karma reason!

geeeze about time you showed up docM and with some brillant facts too. thanks.

His post just touched a "very" sore spot with me. If it had been up to me, John Kerry would have been stood against a wall at dawn and shot by a firing squad!

To hear that treasonous SOB described as a "hero", PISSED me off!

Successfully updated karma reason!

drmiller, thank you for that link. I read it with interest. It would appear Kerry violated the law, yet I think your reply is a tad over the top. Like this one:

In the greater scheme of things I am not sure why you would think someone should be shot for seeking peace. Recent experience suggests Conservatives tend to go for this solution. First, don't talk to your enemies. Second, claim those who do are useless or traitors. Third, have a war. Fourth, invite every one's kiddos. Fifth, make sure your son or daughter doesn't enlist. Oh, well, let's just string 'em all up. I admit, I felt the same way about GW, that draft dodging silver spooner. So, maybe you're right. Lets go shoot 'em all.

Successfully updated karma reason!

LOL back to me eh? I decided that you guys are way to closed minded to at least consider anything I have to say. Something can be right in the open and underneath your nose and most of you would look to other way. Whether it's conscious or subconscious it's true. It may not be for another 100 - 500 years but I have a feeling that this story (USA and the rest of the world) is not going to have a very happy ending.

Successfully updated karma reason!